Page 88 - Q&A Book.indd

Can one e-mail constitute harassment?

Lucian Companie
March 2017

“At work one of my colleagues recently replied to an e-mail
that I had sent to him, in a terribly derogatory fashion, calling
me names and insulting me in a very chauvinistic fashion.
He sent his reply to me and many of my colleagues and
I am ashamed by what he said and how he riduculed me
as a woman in front of my colleagues. I feel victimized by his
conduct. But what can I do, it was just an e-mail?”

In terms of the Protection from Harassment Act, 2011 (“the Act”),
harassment is seen as conduct that takes place repetitively over a period
of time to constitute harassment. However, our courts have recently held
that for a victim to be granted protection under the Act, the conduct
need not be repetitive in nature and that a victim would be entitled
to protection if a single act was of such an overwhelmingly oppressive
nature, that it would have the same effect on the victim as to a victim
experiencing protracted harassment.
The Act’s definition of harassment includes conduct that a perpetrator
knows or ought to know will cause harm, which means any mental,
psychological or economic harm or inspires the reasonable belief on the
part of the victim that harm will be caused to the victim or any member
of his/her family. This can include (but is even wider) unreasonably
following, watching, pursuing a person, unreasonable verbal, electronic
or other communication and or unreasonable sending of letters, faxes,
telegrams, packages, text messages and / or e-mails to a person, as well
as sexual harassment and bullying.

Litigation Under the Act, a victim can relatively informal and cost effectively obtain
a protection order and enforce such against a perpetrator and have
such formally served on them. The Act, unlike the Domestic Violence Act,
does not require a “domestic relationship” between the complainant
and the perpetrator.
In your situation, the single e-mail of your colleague could constitute
harassment under the Act and allow you to consider the remedies
afforded under the Act. It would be prudent to consult your attorney to
discuss the merits and various options available to you to address the
conduct of your colleague before you take any steps.

83